Wakilii

Conservative Party v Attorney General and Anor (Consitutional Petition No. 31 of 2015)

Constitutional Court · [2021] UGCC 31 · 2021 Petition Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Constitutional petition challenging the constitutionality of the Presidential Elections (Amendment) Act 14 of 2015 and the Parliamentary Elections (Amendment) Act 15 of 2015
Decision
Petition dismissed; impugned Acts upheld as constitutional.

Observed later treatment

No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.

Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains good law.

AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions—always read the source judgment before relying on it.

Holding

The Constitutional Court dismissed the petition challenging the 2015 amendments to the Presidential and Parliamentary Elections Acts. It held that public participation in the legislative process, while good governance, is not a constitutional requirement, and the petitioner adduced no evidence that Parliament contravened Articles 91(1) or 94. Surveying comparative practice, the Court found nomination fees of UGX 3,000,000 for Members of Parliament and UGX 20,000,000 for Presidential candidates were not manifestly high; the right to stand for election is a derogable right subject to Article 43 limitations. The fees are regulatory and do not impose qualifications beyond Articles 80 and 102. The petition raised enforcement, not interpretation, issues.

Outcome

Petition dismissed; impugned Acts upheld as constitutional.

Facts

The Conservative Party, a registered political party, challenged amendments made by Parliament to the Presidential Elections Act and Parliamentary Elections Act through Acts 14 and 15 of 2015. The amendments raised nomination fees to UGX 3,000,000 for parliamentary candidates and UGX 20,000,000 for presidential candidates. The petitioner contended the amending bills were not published in sufficient time to enable public participation, and that the enhanced fees were manifestly excessive, disqualifying potential candidates and disenfranchising the electorate by setting qualifications beyond those in the Constitution. The petitioner stated it had rolled out its programmes in May 2015 under the earlier law before the amendments were passed in October 2015. Both respondents denied the laws were unconstitutional, contending the fees responded to changing circumstances Parliament was obliged to consider. The matter proceeded by written submissions.

Issues

  1. Whether the Presidential Elections (Amendment) Act 14 of 2015 and the Parliamentary Elections (Amendment) Act 15 of 2015 are unconstitutional for having been passed by Parliament in violation of Articles 91(1) and 94(1) of the Constitution.
  2. Whether Sections 10(6)(b) of the Presidential Elections Act and 11(3) of the Parliamentary Elections Act are unconstitutional for providing prohibitive nomination fees that disqualify potential candidates and disenfranchise the people contrary to Article 1 of the Constitution.
  3. Whether Section 10(6) of the Presidential Elections Act and Section 11(3) of the Parliamentary Elections Act have the unconstitutional effect of providing qualifications and disqualifications for candidates beyond those in the Constitution, contrary to Article 2.
  4. Whether the 2nd respondent, by demanding payment of the nomination fees, is acting in violation of Article 21(1) of the Constitution guaranteeing equal protection of the law.
  5. What remedies are available.

Orders

  • Petition dismissed.
  • No order as to costs, the petition having been brought largely in the public interest.

Rules and key headnotes

Constitutional Law — Legislative Process — Public Participation in Law-Making
While it is a principle of good governance that Parliament should as far as practicable involve the public in the legislative process, public participation is not a constitutional requirement, and Article 91(1) sets no time frame within which legislation must be passed.
Electoral Law — Nomination Fees — Regulatory Conditions versus Constitutional Qualifications
Nomination fees prescribed for presidential and parliamentary candidates are regulatory requirements intended to regulate the election process and do not impose qualifications or disqualifications additional to those set out in Articles 80 and 102 of the Constitution.
Human Rights — Right to Stand for Election — Derogability and Permissible Limitation
The right to stand for elective office is not absolute; not falling under Article 44, it is a derogable right subject to the limitations in Article 43, and the imposition of nomination fees is an acceptable limitation demonstrably justifiable in a free and democratic society.
Constitutional Law — Jurisdiction of the Constitutional Court — Interpretation versus Enforcement
Where a petitioner concedes Parliament could lawfully provide for a measure and complains only that it was set excessively, the issue is one of enforcement of rights rather than constitutional interpretation, over which the Constitutional Court has no jurisdiction.

Legislation cited (18)

Cases cited (3)

  • Mbabaali Jude v Hon. Edward Kiwanuka Ssekandi (Constitutional Petition No. 28 of 2012)
  • Attorney General v Major General David Tinyenfuza (Constitutional Appeal No. 1 of 1997)
  • Serugo v KCC and Attorney General (Constitutional Appeal No. 2 of 1998)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.

Conservative Party v Attorney General and Anor (Consitutional Petition No. 31 of 2015) [2021] UGCC 31 (15 March 2021)
Source: this page presents Wakilii’s issue analysis and metadata for a publicly reported Ugandan judgment. Any AI-generated summary is marked as such. Judgment text is sourced from the Uganda Legal Information Institute (ulii.org). Wakilii is not affiliated with ULII.